1 2026:CGHC:23891 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCRC No. 3698 of 2026 Tikaram Sahu S/o- Dwarika Prasad Sahu Aged About 32 Years Address- House No. 55, Bazar Chowk, Gorba, Police Station Bilaigah, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Applicant versus State of Chhattisgarh Through - Police Station Sarsiwa, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, Chhattisgarh. ... Non-Applicant For Applicant : Mr. Rishabh Mishra, Advocate For Non-Applicant/State : Mr. Shaleen Singh Baghel, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice Order on Board 15.06.2026 1. This is the first bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) for grant of regular bail to the applicant who has been arrested in connection with Crime No. 390/2025 registered at Police Station- Sarsiwan, District- Sarangarh-Bilaigarh, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(2), 336(3), 336(4), 338, 340(2), 341(1), 341(2), and 3(5) of of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that while the applicant, Tikaram Sahu, was posted as PB Sales Officer in HDFC Bank, an amount of RAHUL DEWANGAN Digitally signed by RAHUL DEWANGAN 2 approximately Rs.21,00,000/-, which had been placed under hold in the HDFC Bank account of co-accused Ritu Sahu in connection with Crime No.131/2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 409, 120-B and 34 of the IPC and Sections 6 and 10 of the Chhattisgarh Nikshepakon Ke Hiton Ka Sanrakshan Adhiniyam, 2005, was allegedly released and withdrawn on the basis of forged and fabricated documents bearing a fake seal and forged signatures of the Station House Officer, Police Station Sarsiwan. It is alleged that the said forged documents were submitted before the bank and, without obtaining verification from the concerned police station, the hold on the account was removed and the amount was allowed to be withdrawn through cheque. The case diary further reveals that the seizure of the forged seal, other relevant documents and the withdrawn amount is yet to be effected. It is also reflected from the case diary that despite the proceedings initiated by the District Magistrate for attachment/confiscation of the said amount in the connected case, the applicant remained involved in a criminal conspiracy to facilitate its withdrawal. Thus, prima facie involvement of the applicant in the aforesaid offence is borne out from the material available on record. The memorandum statement of the applicant has also been collected during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. Hence, the present bail application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and that his arrest is 3 illegal and contrary to the provisions of Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, as no material exists to justify his arrest, particularly when the charge-sheet has already been filed and no offence is made out against him. It is further submitted that the investigation itself is without jurisdiction inasmuch as the alleged occurrence falls within the territorial limits of Police Station Bilaigarh, whereas the investigation has been conducted by Police Station Sarsiwa. He contends that the applicant was actually apprehended on 07.02.2026 from his workplace, though his arrest has been shown on 08.02.2026, and that no written grounds of arrest were supplied to him as mandated by law. It is also submitted that the alleged memorandum/confessional statement was obtained under coercion and cannot be relied upon. He further submits that the involvement of the administrative authorities in directing registration of the FIR and conducting inquiries into a criminal matter was without jurisdiction and has resulted in the applicant being falsely implicated under political and administrative pressure while the real culprits have been shielded. It is argued that the applicant is a law-abiding citizen, a permanent employee of HDFC Bank, and had merely discharged his official duties by furnishing information and documents sought by the authorities from time to time. The alleged acts of forgery and fabrication are attributable to other accused persons and no pecuniary or other benefit accrued to the applicant. It is further submitted that the Branch Manager’s complaint was directed against the actual perpetrators of the fraud and not against the applicant. He further submits that the applicant 4 has no previous criminal antecedents, the charge-sheet has been filed, he is in jail since 08.02.2026, and the trial is likely to take some time for its conclusion. Therefore, he prays for grant of bail to the applicant. 4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the bail application and submits that the charge-sheet has been filed before the competent Court. He further submits that the applicant was not a mere spectator but was actively involved in facilitating the release and withdrawal of the amount lying in a bank account which had been put on hold in connection with a criminal case. It is submitted that the forged and fabricated documents bearing a fake seal and forged signatures of the concerned police authorities were acted upon without proper verification, resulting in withdrawal of a substantial amount which was otherwise liable to remain under hold. The investigation has revealed sufficient material indicating the applicant’s involvement in the conspiracy and his memorandum statement also forms part of the case diary. Considering the nature and gravity of the offence, the material collected during investigation and the applicant’s involvement therein, it is prayed that the applicant does not deserve the benefit of bail and the application is liable to be rejected. 5. I have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the case diary. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case that thought the allegations against the applicant are that the applicant actively facilitated the release of the amount from an 5 account which had been placed under hold in connection with a criminal case on the basis of forged and fabricated documents, but it is to be noted that the applicant is in jail since 08.02.2026, the charge-sheet has already been filed before the competent Court, he has no previous criminal antecedents, and the trial is likely to take considerable time for its conclusion. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the present applicant is entitled to be released on regular bail in this case. 7. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is allowed. Let the applicant - Tikaram Sahu, involved in Crime No. 390/2025 registered at Police Station- Sarsiwan, District- Sarangarh- Bilaigarh, (C.G.) for the offence punishable under Sections 318(2), 336(3), 336(4), 338, 340(2), 341(1), 341(2), and 3(5) of of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like sum to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or 6 through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 84 of BNSS. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 209 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of BNSS. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 8. Office is directed to provide a certified copy of this order to the trial Court concerned for necessary information and compliance forthwith. Sd/- (Ramesh Sinha) Chief Justice Rahul Dewangan